Talk:Toon Zelda

From Zelda Wiki, the Zelda encyclopedia
Latest comment: 2 September 2016 by Ixbran in topic Updated


Uh, I was gonna try drafting this page up, but I guess it was locked because of some old vandal or ignorant user or something? We do need this for HW, right? Peanutjon (talk) 02:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It was for rumor protection. Unlocked. - TonyT S C 02:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I added T!Zelda's info regarding her appearance in the SSB series. I figure since we use Toon Link to talk about all his appearances outside of mainstream Zelda, we could do the same for Toon Zelda since the info was already here on the wiki. I also feel it helps make the page feel less empty.
Ixbran (talk) 22:29, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As I agree with you, Im sure the stuff is gonna say something like "She was never referred or called as "Toon Zelda" in those later appearance", but to me, I feel it's fair. Wolfgerlion64 (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
She may not have been referred too as such in those titles, but those trophies are still Zelda in the Toon Style, so I figure it counts.
Ixbran (talk) 22:53, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Toon Link page is not purposed to be a repository for information on Link's appearances outside of the main series, we have a separate page for that. The Toon Link page is meant to be used to exclusively document instances of the Link specifically known as "Toon Link". The same is meant for this page, and given that Toon Zelda is not a realized concept in the Smash series, the trophy information belongs on this page, where it already exists.
Insofar as the unused content in Smash, we have a page for that as well. We don't document unused content in the mainspace, so it must go there. - TonyT S C 23:05, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good luck keeping this page from being just a stub then. Personally I think those reasons for not having that info on her page doesn't really make sense to me, and should be considered for re-evaluation, like the Cameo policy. But that's just my opinion.
Ixbran (talk) 23:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]